Meta:Editorial guidelines
These editorial guidelines are still being drafted. They may be changed, possibly drastically, before a consensus is reached. Raison d'être and purpose The Geek Feminism Wiki is intended to be a resource for women and other marginalized groups in geek communities, as well as a platform for discussion and documentation of the issues they face. Amongst other things, we aim to: * examine geek culture from a feminist viewpoint * introduce geek women to tools, analysis and strategies (relatively) well known in feminism that can be useful to them * introduce geek women to initiatives and organizations created to support them * improve the visibility of women, women's work and women's organizations in geek culture * detail counter-arguments to anti-feminist viewpoints encountered in geekdom * provide evidence (ranging from anecdotal to research-quality) that sexism in geek culture is endemic and systemic * explore other oppressions that intersect with gender in geek culture Values * feminist * inclusive (in opposition to Geek gatekeeping, we believe anyone who wants to participate in geek communities, and can follow basic behavior standards, belongs.) * intersectional: "Our feminism will be intersectional, or it will be bullshit" — Flavia Dzodan. Point of view and scope The Geek Feminism Wiki aims to provide a feminist perspective on geekdom and the broader world. Including non-feminist or anti-feminist points of view is outside the scope of this project. Given that the vast majority of the Internet presents a non-feminist perspective on the world, there is little value and much harm in representing non-feminist perspectives in this particular space. We define geekdom broadly—roughly as "things that participants identify as 'geeky' or 'geek culture'". (For more on this, see the Geek Feminism page.) In-scope: * introduction to feminism for those coming in good faith, especially women and other members of geek communities * addressing non-feminist viewpoints where it would be potentially helpful to geek women * summaries of and feminist analysis/critique of anti-feminist viewpoints Out of scope: * non/anti-feminist viewpoints not clearly marked as such and not accompanied by feminist critique * non/anti-feminist viewpoints stated as if they are the editorial position of the wiki * apologia for misogynist, anti-feminist, oppressive, or other harmful actions or ideas, except to the extent they need to be described to be repudiated Specific points of clarification The Geek Feminism Wiki is not Wikipedia * We do not have an NPOV policy. Instead, we explicitly declare that we analyse topics from a feminist perspective. * Further to which: the editorial point of view of the wiki is a feminist one. Framing it as such is not only permitted, but encouraged. Presenting a non-feminist or anti-feminist viewpoint as that of the wiki is verboten. * While citations are preferred wherever possible, we do not require them. Much of our wiki is primary source material, sometimes added anonymously in order to avoid backlash against the whistleblower. Original research is welcome. * Notability is measured against the yardstick of this wiki's goals and values, not against that of Wikipedia or geek culture as a whole. Our vision of intersectional feminism As a consequence of the values and purpose described above, we * are not sympathetic to TERF viewpoints, nor any other position that denies the lived experience of transgendered people * are not sympathetic to health or body policing Moderation Perspective As one might expect, this wiki is a frequent target for vandalism, attempts to delete content or distort its meaning, and so forth. While the admins would dearly love to contemplate each contribution at length, writing thoughtful, sensitive and detailed feminist analyses of any which we were regrettably required to decline, we sadly do not have copious amounts of free time to lavish upon the wiki. As such, non-constructive edits tend to be assertively and rather bluntly rejected. Too, accounts and IP addresses that submit such changes are often summarily banned, so as to prevent having to revert many of them. Controversial edits: please talk first Further to the above, if you are about to make a change that could easily be interpreted as a bad-faith edit, please discuss it on the article's talk page first. While not strictly required, doing so runs less risk of your assuredly good intentions being misconstrued. Whyyy did you revert my edits?!? Besides outright vandalism and other hostility, common reasons include: * equivocation * softening of legitimate criticism * introduction of irrelevant information * blatant apologia for acts which are rightly condemnable * concern trolling or use of the tone argument You may find some of the introductory resources on the wiki helpful in learning about why your changes were rejected. The Feminism 101 and Elementary mistakes in feminist discussion pages are two suggested starting points.